Stop Talking About The Bible

Discussion in 'Faith and Religion' started by Yard Dart, Jan 15, 2014.


  1. Gopherman

    Gopherman Sometimes I Wish I Could Go Back to Sleep

    Anytime Godliness is removed from anything, the situation GOES STRAIGHT TO HELL!!!![reddevil][dancindevil]
     
    Yard Dart likes this.
  2. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    Hell is the situation when the godly have enthusiastically inserted godliness for the benefit of the godly...many is the human bonfire that has been built, lit and stoked by the desire of godly people to do godly things on behalf of their god.


    Many are the barbecued heretic and infidel who have pondered on how wonderful godliness had become in their situation.
    :eek:
     
    tulianr and Gopherman like this.
  3. Gopherman

    Gopherman Sometimes I Wish I Could Go Back to Sleep

    True but a lot of un-Godly people have died the same way, with no comfort!:rolleyes:
     
    tulianr likes this.
  4. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    [LMAO] It's cold comfort for the ungodly, that burning at the stake is for their benefit.[micro]

    [​IMG]

    Via: The Christian Handbook - Beliefnet.com
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2014
  5. Gopherman

    Gopherman Sometimes I Wish I Could Go Back to Sleep

  6. Kingfish

    Kingfish Self Reliant

    Religion is in a sad state of affairs these days. I want to do something about it but am stopped it seems at every corner. My congressman has no answers and church continues to practice what it preaches. It turns the other cheek. In these days ahead persecution will happen to many of faith. It has been prophesied so it should not come as a surprise to Christians . I just ask my non Christian friends to not join the bash barty. Call me an idiot because I AM not because of my faith. I have good friend who is really trying to convert me to become an atheist . He just does not understand that I belong to Jesus Christ. Someday he will see the truth. I hope he sees it before its too late.
     
    Yard Dart, Sapper John and Minuteman like this.
  7. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    I have no problem with people of other faiths. I extend the same respect for their right to believe what they want, as I would like them to extend back to me. Whether they do or not, that's not the point to me.

    The Golden Rule does not say "Treat other people how they treat you", it says "Treat people how you want to be treated". But for some reason people want to confuse the two.

    One thing I do is accept that the very nature of faith is to have it irregardless of 'facts' and right/wrong don't necessarily apply, it's merely a question of what's right for the individual. I don't expect what's right for me to be right for others. What I believe is universally unequivocally wrong when it comes to personal views is trying to force your views on others.
     
    ghrit, Yard Dart and tulianr like this.
  8. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

    I have no personal experience with being on either side of the stake, but I've actually read that the Christians would use green wood and greenery on the fires of those to whom they bore no particular animosity; the ones who simply needed to be burned to save their souls. The idea being that the individual would expire of smoke inhalation prior to being consumed by the flames. They would also sometimes strangle the individual into unconsciousness prior to firing them up, just out of Christian kindness. That was the mercy shown William Tyndale, who had the audacity to translate the Bible into English.
     
    chelloveck and Yard Dart like this.
  9. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member


    This may sound like semantics to some but it makes a HUGE difference to many believers. It wasn't "Christians" who are infamous for burning people at the stake, like Tyndale and others, it was the catholic church. The catholic church is a man made, totally flawed, totally corrupt and IMHO evil institution. And no, I'm not one of those who are saying that all catholics are going to hell. There are some very good and godly people who follow that particular religion. The religion itself, the institution is responsible for the murder of more people than any other person or group in the history of the world. Hitler was a lightweight compared to them and Stalin and Mao were junior league.
    I highly recommend reading Foxes Book of Martyrs. It is an early account of many of the martyrs who were murdered for their faith. Read the accounts of their tortures and painful deaths and then ask yourself if that many people, over the course of history, would endure such torment, pain and death for a fantasy. If they were not 100% convicted in their beliefs they would simply renounce their "heresies" and they would have been set free. But so sure of their faith, so certain of their God were they that they were willing to give up their lives in a most brutal and painful manner rather than renounce their belief. What system on earth, what man made institution conjures that type of certainty? That is why Christians, true Christians, are so certain of our faith, so sure of our convictions. We would give up our very lives before we would deny it.
    Things like the Inquisition, corruption and vice, selling church favors etc are products of man mad religion. I have stated before that I absolutely hate religion. That is why I try to differentiate between the two. Faith is a belief in a creator. Simply that. Religion is a man made expression of that faith. And anything man made can be flawed, corrupt and evil. And I would not willingly, gladly, lay down my life for it nor do I think men like Tyndale would either.
     
  10. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

    I don't mean to infer that modern day Christians should share the guilt of the crimes committed in the name of Christianity these many centuries ago; but I think that the use of the word "Christian" to refer to the individuals who committed those crimes is apt. Just as the term "southerner" is appropriate to describe American citizens born and raised in the southern United States prior to the emancipation of enslaved black Americans. "Southerner" is still a proper appellation for those born and raised in the south today, even though they share no burden of guilt associated with the horrible crimes against humanity committed by many of those of the southern (and northern) society during the years that slavery was an enshrined part of that society.

    The Catholic church was, until the protestant reformation, the only expression of Christianity allowed; ergo, the Catholic Church was Christianity, and Christianity was the Catholic Church. There are many contemporaries who wish to establish the myth of a separate strand of Christianity, dating all the way back to the time of Christ, and to claim that their faith comes from that tradition, and thus escape any connection to the crimes of the Catholic Church, but that is, I believe, fantasy. Yes, there were Christians who did not agree with the Catholic Church - the Arians, the Cerinthians, the Ebionites, the Monophysites, the Gnostics, the Marcionists, the Montanists, the Syrian Naranis, and the Waldensian and the Albigensian communities; most of whom were persecuted or eliminated by the Catholic Church. None of these groups represented mainstream Christianity, which was the Catholic Church; and, with the possible exception of the Monophysites who are represented by the Egyptian Coptic Church, none of them continue to the present day, and thus establish an unbroken chain of tradition for modern Christians.

    Crimes were committed by Christians, in the name of their faith, in the past; and in isolated cases, are still committed today. That doesn't mean that all modern Christians need share the guilt of those crimes, any more than all Muslims need share the guilt of the crimes being committed by idiots today, who claim to be killing and persecuting in the name of Islam.

    I was born and raised in the south and am thus, a "southerner." I do not, however, share in the guilt of those southerners of years past who committed crimes against humanity by participating in the enslavement of other human beings. As a southerner, it would be convenient to use the term "Plantation Owners" to refer to those southern individuals who directly enslaved other individuals, but I think that would be somewhat intellectually and morally dishonest, because the society as a whole participated in the activity, whether each individual owned slaves or not. It was the laws of the society which made these crimes possible, just as it was the acquiescence of the entire society which made the Jim Crow laws possible. Were there dissenters? Absolutely, and courageous individuals they were. The southern society though and, prior to 1865, American society as a whole, was guilty of these crimes.

    It is inconvenient and uncomfortable for modern Christians to share the title with others who have committed shameful deeds in the name of Christianity, whether it be the Catholic Church, the Puritans of Salem, or the Westboro crazies; but it is a title claimed by each of them.
     
    chelloveck and BTPost like this.
  11. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member

    And I don't mean to infer that there is a strain of Christianity that is more "Christian" than any other. But the fact that the religious institution of Catholicism was "the only expression of Christianity allowed; ergo, the Catholic Church was Christianity, and Christianity was the Catholic Church." is one of the great deceptions and lies of all time. The origins of this religion dates back far beyond the time of Christ. It was in the time of Nimrod and Semiramis that this religion began and with it many of the trappings and rituals practiced by it still today.(rosary beads, the confessional, the sacrament, nuns habits and priests robes to name just a few) A religion so vile that Nimrods grandfather, Ham (Noahs son) hunted him down and killed him and cut his body into pieces to be sent throughout the land as a warning to any who would practice it.
    That this modern incarnation of it would usurp the name Christian and proclaim itself to be "The Church", and be accepted as such, is a grand deception unrivaled in all of history. A deception that was meant to deceive the very elect.
    I recommend reading Alexander Hislops "The Two Babylons" for a very in-depth expose of the origins of this "Church".
    The crimes and evil committed by this religion over time is not shared by the true "church" of Christ today in any way. (no matter what denomination they ascribe themselves to. A practice that Paul himself condemns and warns us not to engage in)Even those who are raised in it and unaware of it's roots are not to blame for it's past, and continuing crimes. But I feel they should heed the warning to "come out of her my people". So there are people of God in the religion, just as there were in the past. It was these people of God that they burned alive and slaughtered by the thousands. So to call them "Christians" is dishonest. They called themselves that but scripture says "by their acts you will know them". The act of murdering thousands of devoted believers to hide the evil and sinful nature of your institution is not the work of Christians, no matter what they call themselves.

    Like I said many will see this as just semantics but to believers it is a very important distinction.
     
  12. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

    I can understand the desire to push the historic Catholic Church into a separate realm from modern Christianity, but I think that the connection to the Old Testament is spurious, to say the least. The historic Catholic Church, in my opinion, was simply an evolutionary stage in the development of modern Christianity. Modern Christians, be they Catholic, Protestant, or other, in my opinion, are a continuation of that ongoing evolution of Christianity. Modern Christians, no matter their particular confession, are a part of the larger whole - historic, contemporary, and future. I agree that many of the acts of the historic Catholic Church were contrary to the writings of the New Testament, though not necessarily to those of the Old Testament; but those acts were committed by those who saw themselves as Christians. Who am I to label them differently?

    Christianity, from at least the first century, has struggled to define itself within its scripture, and sometimes in contrast to that scripture. Christians individually, and in groups, have similarly struggled to define themselves within that scripture, and often against the contrast of other Christians and Christian institutions, both historic and contemporary. They are all Christians though.

    What is different about these various groups competing for the title of "True Christian" is their culture - the culture defined by time, place, and people. Of course modern Christians (most of them at least) would not ascribe to the view of the historic Catholic Church that heresy should be punished by torture and death; that the crusades was a perfectly honorable undertaking; that the burning of witches was good family entertainment. It is the culture though, that has changed the nature of the religion. It is the process of human, cultural, and political evolution which has brought about this change in mindset. I can not agree with the activities and practices of my ancestors - genetic, historical, or cultural; but I can't deny those ancestors, with any degree of honesty at least. It is what it is, they were who they were, and I am who I am.
     
    kellory, chelloveck and ghrit like this.
  13. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart,Deadman Walking, Snow Monkey Moderator

    Well Said..... I suspect that the same is TRUE, for any Religious Order.... .....
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7